BACKGROUND: This study presents late results of a previously published 2-year prospective comparison between Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGBP) versus biliopancreatic diversion with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (BPD-RYGBP) in an exclusively non-superobese population. METHODS: From a cohort of 130 patients with a BMI of 35-50 kg/m(2), 65 were randomly selected to undergo RYGBP and 65 to BPD-RYGBP. All underwent follow-up evaluation at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively and every year thereafter. RESULTS: Follow-up at the eighth year was achieved in 60% of the BPD-RYGBP and in 58% of the RYGBP group (p = 1.00). Mean excess weight loss (EWL%), was significantly higher following BPD-RYGBP (76.89 ± 1.53) as compared to RYGBP (67.17 ± 1.43) (p = 0.0004). The mean success rate (percentage of patients with EWL% ≥50%) was significantly higher after BPD-RYGBP (95.85 ± 1.01) than RYGBP (75.91 ± 3.58) (p = 0.0001). No significant differences were observed for late non-metabolic complications. The incidence of anemia, iron deficiency, B12 deficiency, and low-ferritin levels was relatively high in both groups with not always significant differences. Severe protein malnutrition occurred in four patients (three BPD-RYGBP and one RYGBP) (p = 0.37). In only one BPD-RYGBP patient (1.54%) was revision surgery to RYGBP necessary, due to recurrent episodes of hypoproteinemia. The remaining patients were treated successfully with total parenteral nutrition and nutritional counseling. CONCLUSIONS: Late results presented in this paper agree with the previously published 2-year results of the same patient cohort. Although both procedures are safe and effective, BPD-RYGBP seems to prevail in terms of successful weight loss without a significantly higher incidence of metabolic and non-metabolic complications.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: This study presents late results of a previously published 2-year prospective comparison between Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGBP) versus biliopancreatic diversion with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (BPD-RYGBP) in an exclusively non-superobese population. METHODS: From a cohort of 130 patients with a BMI of 35-50 kg/m(2), 65 were randomly selected to undergo RYGBP and 65 to BPD-RYGBP. All underwent follow-up evaluation at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively and every year thereafter. RESULTS: Follow-up at the eighth year was achieved in 60% of the BPD-RYGBP and in 58% of the RYGBP group (p = 1.00). Mean excess weight loss (EWL%), was significantly higher following BPD-RYGBP (76.89 ± 1.53) as compared to RYGBP (67.17 ± 1.43) (p = 0.0004). The mean success rate (percentage of patients with EWL% ≥50%) was significantly higher after BPD-RYGBP (95.85 ± 1.01) than RYGBP (75.91 ± 3.58) (p = 0.0001). No significant differences were observed for late non-metabolic complications. The incidence of anemia, iron deficiency, B12 deficiency, and low-ferritin levels was relatively high in both groups with not always significant differences. Severe protein malnutrition occurred in four patients (three BPD-RYGBP and one RYGBP) (p = 0.37). In only one BPD-RYGBP patient (1.54%) was revision surgery to RYGBP necessary, due to recurrent episodes of hypoproteinemia. The remaining patients were treated successfully with total parenteral nutrition and nutritional counseling. CONCLUSIONS: Late results presented in this paper agree with the previously published 2-year results of the same patient cohort. Although both procedures are safe and effective, BPD-RYGBP seems to prevail in terms of successful weight loss without a significantly higher incidence of metabolic and non-metabolic complications.
Authors: Dimitri J Pournaras; Erlend T Aasheim; Marco Bueter; Ahmed R Ahmed; Richard Welbourn; Torsten Olbers; Carel W le Roux Journal: Surg Obes Relat Dis Date: 2012-03-03 Impact factor: 4.734
Authors: Carlijn Kuin; Floor den Ouden; Hans Brandts; Laura Deden; Eric Hazebroek; Marcel van Borren; Hans de Boer Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2019-10 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: María D Ballesteros-Pomar; Tomás González de Francisco; Ana Urioste-Fondo; Luis González-Herraez; Alicia Calleja-Fernández; Alfonso Vidal-Casariego; Vicente Simó-Fernández; Isidoro Cano-Rodríguez Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Asja E Schollenberger; Jaana M Heinze; Tobias Meile; Andreas Peter; Alfred Königsrainer; Stephan C Bischoff Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Karl P Rheinwalt; Andreas Plamper; Marcia V Rückbeil; Andreas Kroh; Ulf P Neumann; Tom F Ulmer Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2020-04 Impact factor: 4.129